Toronto Estate Law Blog : Toronto Estate Lawyer : Hull & Hull Law Firm : Trust Mediation and Succession Planning : Serving Ontario, Ottawa, Mississauga, Hamilton

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

In an aging society, our elderly can easily fall prey to predators looking to exploit them. Elder abuse can take many different forms: physical, psychological or financial abuse, or simply neglect.

I read an article yesterday about Huguette Clark, the 104 year old heiress whose wealth is estimated at half a billion dollars. During her lifetime, Clark made generous gifts towards those who cared for her. For instance, it is reported that Clark gifted $10 million dollars to her social secretary. 

It is reported that Clark’s wealth is being managed by her lawyer and her accountant. 

A former paralegal who worked for Clark’s attorney, has now blown the whistle on what she alleges is improper behavior by Clark’s attorney and accountant. According to reports, it is alleged that they “drafted a will that would have left money to [one of them], trying repeatedly to persuade her to sign it — then joked about their client and cursed her behind her back when she would not sign the will.” It is also reported that her lawyer allegedly solicited from Clark $1.5 million dollars to build a security system for a community where his daughters and their families live. In addition he allegedly sold a Stradivarius violin for $6 million dollars and a Renoir painting for $23.5 million. 

A criminal investigation has now been launched by the Manhattan district attorney, who has the Elder Abuse Unit of the New York County District Attorney's Office looking into the handling of Clark's finances.

It bears repeating that the complaints at this stage are unproven allegations. Nonetheless, the mere thought that this could happen provides us with a dreadful reminder of what the elderly face in our society today.

Thank you for reading,

Rick Bickhram - Click here for more information on Rick Bickhram.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

When I read a recent article about Mr. Butler, an unemployed Ottawa man who had been cashing his father’s government pension cheques for seven years after his death (totaling about $115,000), I couldn’t help but get just a little annoyed.  Reportedly, he spent most of it at strip clubs - another irritating fact!

How this apparently happened was that after his father’s death, his pension cheques continued to be directly deposited into their joint bank account.  The bank was never notified of the death. Mr. Butler asserts that he had assumed the payments were either government child benefits or survivor benefits (interesting twist given that his father was reportedly a longtime accountant for the federal government).  

While Mr. Butler pleaded guilty to the fraud (and was placed under house arrest for a year), he filed for bankruptcy to avoid paying the restitution Order obtained. Unfortunately, the money will never be reimbursed. Ironically, Mr. Butler turned 65 during his house arrest and started collecting a pension himself. 

I fear this type of thing happens much more often then one would expect, although likely on a smaller scale. I wonder if in cases such as this whether the government has ever sought restitution by garnishing pension funds (or getting the Court’s authority to do so, if needed)? I can appreciate at least two sides to this question – I suppose when there is an unwitting recipient of government funds, taking part or all of their pension away could be seen as a harsh result. That said, receiving thousands of dollars in tax-payers hard-earned money with impunity (albeit innocently) is arguably unfair to the public.  If any practitioner in the area knows the answer to this question I would be happy to hear from him/her. 

Have a great weekend! 

Natalia R. Angelini - Click here for more information on Natalia Angelini.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

In Laidlaw Estate, Re, a recent decision of the Court of Queen’s Bench of Alberta, the court considered an application for a grant of probate in respect of a Will containing handwritten changes.

The key facts are that the Deceased executed a typewritten Will made with the assistance of a lawyer. Changes were later made to the Will gifting a Bond to certain beneficiaries, consisting of handwritten words and numbers.  The Testator signed the handwritten changes.  There were no witnesses to the handwritten changes made to the Will. 

Testimony was given that the signature at end of changes appeared to be testator’s usual signature. Interestingly, the handwritten changes contained er­rors in spelling of the beneficiary names (although this was also the case in the Will as the Testator apparently suffered from dyslexia, which explained the mistakes).

The Court granted the probate application, and in so doing, it found that the handwritten changes could be understood independently of the typed text, such that they were found to constitute a valid holograph Codicil to the original Will. In coming to its decision the Court was guided by its stated policy to do everything possible to give effect to testamentary writings in holograph form. 

While this is an Alberta case, the applicable legislation is similar to ours, and it makes for an interesting read.  

Have a good day,

Natalia R. Angelini - Click here for more information on Natalia Angelini.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

I don’t know about you, but I would be enjoying this heat wave a lot more if I wasn’t smack dab in the centre of the smog advisory zone. Although, I can’t really complain as I wasn’t one of the unlucky people stuck in elevator shafts during the power outage earlier this week without air conditioning. Ugh.

On the opposite end of the spectrum, going through a hot summer confined in a cold air-conditioned office is another form of torture in my view. Interestingly, an article in the July 2, 2010 edition of The Lawyers Weekly on room temperature gathered the following data from a survey of 95 US office buildings:

·                    When the air gets too chilly, productivity declines.

·                    Symptoms were found of, among other things, problems with upper and lower respiratory tracts, eyes, and skin as well as headache, fatigue, and difficulty concentrating.  These symptoms were increased by 50% in buildings kept below 23 degrees (often temperatures are set on the assumption that the building is full - research indicates usually 40 to 50% of employees are there).

·                    When people experience temperatures they feel comfortable with (usually warmer than cooler) they do more work and spend more time at their desks.

Some recommendations offered are setting room temperature in common areas to industry standards, placing thermostats in individual offices, and possibly adding a humidifier. 

I hope you all find your own way of beating the heat, and the cold. Have a great weekend!

Natalia Angelini - Click here for more information on Natalia Angelini.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Estate litigators in Ontario know full well that the historical rule that costs are usually paid from the estate assets is no longer the case. They are seeing a trend in the case law that if the Court is of the impression that one of the parties to the dispute has behaved improperly at any stage of the litigation, including advancing a position not supported by the evidence, significant cost awards against that person could be made. 

Moreover, Judges seem to be increasingly exercising their discretion to ensure cost awards are subject to the overriding principle of fairness and reasonableness in light of all the circumstances of each particular case, as well as proportionate to the amount at issue. So even if one is successful and has conducted herself appropriately in the litigation, she may still have to absorb a portion of (and possibly all of) her legal costs.

We are also seeing evidence of this trend beyond our borders, notably in a recent Alberta decision, where the Court dismissed a son’s Will challenge in respect of his deceased father’s estate, and similarly dismissed his dependant’s relief claim. 

Notwithstanding his loss, the son sought recovery of his legal costs from the estate. The Court found, however, that he was to personally pay his costs as, (a) the testator did not cause the litigation, (b) the challenge to the testator’s capacity and allegation of undue influence were unreasonable, and (c) the son rejected reasonable offers to settle. Moreover, the son was Ordered to pay “double party-party costs” of his sister, a beneficiary and estate trustee of the estate (as a result of the Rules of Alberta that seem to bear some resemblance to our Rule 49).

I suppose this serves as another reminder to us all to keep this issue top of mind throughout the life of a dispute.

Thanks for reading and have a good day,

Natalia Angelini - Click here for more information on Natalia Angelini.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

The Ontario Bar Association (OBA), Trusts and Estates Section, year end dinner was held on June 1, 2010 at Archeo (Distillery District) in Toronto. 

Suzana Popovic-Montag, the Chair of the Section for the past year, brought the past year to a close and the election of the OBA, Trusts and Estates Section Executive for the 2010/2011 year, was confirmed. 

The Section also paid tribute to this year’s recipient of the Award for Excellence in Trusts and Estates, Hilary Laidlaw.

The Award for Excellence was created to recognize exceptional contributions and achievements by members of the OBA to the area of trusts and estates. The criteria for the award is demonstrated leadership in the trusts and estates bar through knowledge, experience, skill, commitment, passion and strength of character, plus all or some of the following:

·         academic excellence through teaching at the Bar Admission Course, lecturing at a law school, participating in Continuing Legal Education and/or academic writing;

·         participation in the OBA Trusts and Estates Section Executive or the Law Society of Upper Canada on wills, trusts and estate matters; and

·         contribution to the development of wills, trusts and estate law.

In addition to the Award for Excellence, Lionel Smith was awarded with the Widdifield Award and Sender Tator was presented with the Hoffstein Book Prize.

Congrats to Hilary, Lionel and Sender.

In addition, there was a tribute to The Honourable Mr. Justice Maurice Cullity, who is retiring this year.

It was a wonderful change of venue for the dinner and a very enjoyable evening.

Thanks for reading.

Craig R. Vander Zee - Click here for more information on Craig Vander Zee.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

If you are working in Ontario by now you should be aware of Bill 168, the new workplace violence and harassment legislation, which came into force last week. 

An interesting article in the June 14, 2010 edition of the Law Times notes that Premier McGuinty’s government introduced the legislation in part in response to the murder of nurse Lori Dupont in 2005 in her workplace by her former boyfriend, an anesthesiologist at the hospital. The hospital had reportedly known of the doctor’s escalating harassment of Lori, but did not discipline him – they were supposed to work together the day he fatally stabbed her.

We should all be pleased with the introduction of the Bill, and I hope it has a positive impact on the health and safety in workplaces. Notably, breaches can attract fines of up to $500,000 for companies and up to $25,000 or 12 months imprisonment for individuals. Not something to take lightly.

Despite its importance, employers have apparently been having real difficulty complying with the new legislation by the June 15, 2010 deadline (just six months after the Bill received Royal assent). It seems many employers have not addressed their obligations in time, perhaps because they underestimated the amount of requirements they need to comply with, or possibly because they didn’t realize that a “wait and see” approach would not do as Bill 168 requires positive steps on the part of employers. Such requirements include:

-          conduct a risk assessment for violence and harassment in the workplace;

-          develop policies addressing the risks identified; and

-          complete staff training.

Are you ready?

Natalia R. Angelini - Click here for more information on Natalia Angelini.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

In our litigation practice, it is not uncommon to obtain orders permitting clients to register a Certificate of Pending Litigation (CPL) against title to property that is, for instance, an estate asset that one party is seeking to preserve until the litigation is concluded. 

If the litigation stagnates, which can happen from time to time, without reminders in place it is possible for the registered CPL to be left unaddressed. A recent decision in Novia v. Saccoia Estate (Trustee of) illustrates the impact of such a delay. 

The facts of the case are interesting and somewhat complicated, so I am drastically simplifying them here. In short, a dispute arose between a couple over the purchase of a property. A claim was commenced in 1988. A CPL was obtained in 1989. The plaintiff took no further steps in the litigation. The CPL remained on title for a while….oh lets say, until 2010! In 2006 the defendant passed away. In 2010 the estate trustee of the defendant’s estate brought a motion seeking to dismiss the action for delay (how the litigation had not previously been dismissed for delay by the Registrar is a surprise to me). 

The Court reviewed the applicable case law and, based on the evidence before the Court, it found that the delay was inordinate, contumelious and intentional. It also found that the prejudice caused was presumed and actual, as the defendant was no longer able to testify. Accordingly, the action was dismissed and the CPL discharged.

While the facts of this case are uniquely interesting, in my view this case generally serves as a good reminder to all of us to keep an eye on any CPL obtained and properly address its treatment over the life of the litigation.

Have a good day,

Natalia R. Angelini - Click here for more information on Natalia Angelini.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

I could not help but do a double-take when I came across an article with the above-captioned title in the Law Times (June 7, 2010 issue).

It was reported that in 2004, a Toronto lawyer was charged by the Law Society of Upper Canada (LSUC) with professional misconduct for conflict of interest while acting as an estate trustee and solicitor without adequate disclosure to the beneficiaries. It was also alleged that he breached his fiduciary duty as trustee by making several imprudent unsecured loans from the estate. It seems that the line between acting as estate trustee versus acting as lawyer for the estate may have been blurred in this case.

In 2008, the lawyer was found guilty, and he received a two-month suspension and a lifetime prohibition from acting for both borrowers and lenders in private mortgage transactions. The lawyer appealed the decision.

The appeal panel, with Larry Banack writing for the majority, granted the appeal. It found that the original proceeding had “compromised the appearance of fairness” and created a “reasonable apprehension of bias”.  This conclusion appears to have been based on the determination that interventions by the original panel during the lawyer’s oral testimony gave the appearance of “descending into the arena and assuming the role of the prosecution”. This is a departure from the proper role of neutral fact-finder.

This seems to be one of the first times, if not the very first time, that the LSUC appeal panel has made a finding of reasonable apprehension of bias. This decision is also noteworthy given that it involves benchers on the appeal panel being called upon to find against fellow benchers comprising the original panel. As noted in this article, this demonstrates that the LSUC can be very fair in its self-regulating function.

Have a good day,

Natalia R. Angelini - Click here for more information on Natalia Angelini.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

The Sunday Times recently reported that two women were arrested for trying to push a dead relative strapped to a wheelchair onto a flight leaving out of Liverpool John Lennon Airport.  The charge - suspicion of failing to give notification of a death.

Police were apparently called when staff at the check-in desk became suspicious about the elderly man in the wheelchair. He was partially hidden behind sunglasses and did not appear to be moving.  While staff were told he was sleeping, it turns out he had been dead for some time.

It was reported that the ladies were likely attempting to evade the complex and costly process of repatriating human remains abroad - bodies being repatriated by air are required to be contained inside hermetically-sealed zinc-lined coffins and kept in the cargo hold for the duration of the journey. It is also necessary for the proper paperwork to be in place.

It is amazing the lengths these ladies went to to avoid abiding by the rules and regulations one has to adhere to before transporting human remains to a foreign country. Truly a bizarre tale!

Have a great weekend,

Natalia R. Angelini - Click here to learn more about Natalia Angelini.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

The Honourable Justice Brown has in recent months released several Endorsements that appear to be achieving the objective of assisting counsel and the Toronto Region Estates Office by clarifying and streamlining procedural requirements in certain estate matters.

One recent example of this arises out of the Armstrong decision, where after eight months of exchanges with the Toronto Region Estates Office, a non-resident applicant (residing in New Brunswick) had not been granted a Certificate of Appointment of Estate Trustee with a Will. The matter was then sent to a judge for consideration, thereby landing in the lap of Justice Brown. 

After consideration of the facts, including (a) the language of the applicable legislation; (b) that consent of the majority of the persons resident in Ontario had been obtained; and (c) that a bond had been posted in an amount equal to the full value of the estate; His Honour granted the request for a Certificate of Appointment.

While some could view this as a “better late than never” type of situation, as Justice Brown remarks, timely processing of such requests constitutes a critical service provided by the government to the public so they can deal with the assets of a loved one. The goal, therefore, is to achieve a turn-around time of no more than three or four weeks for the issuance of Certificates of Appointment.  

While admittedly this case was not the usual application thereby requiring judicial consideration, it seems we are on our way!

Have a good day,

Natalia Angelini - Click here to learn more about Natalia Angelini.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Blogging has certainly become popular in the last several years as an important source of information and communication. So much so that even lawyers have jumped on the bandwagon. And who would have thought? Being the risk-averse creatures we are, you would not expect publishing our musings for the world to read to be a natural fit; after all, law school is spent teaching you how to avoid risk or, perhaps, how to remedy the consequences of risks taken by your clients. And so, lawyers were slow to wade into the vast sea of bloggers. 

But is blogging so different from anything else we do? Writing is a large part of a lawyer’s profession. Like any profession, education and the sharing of information with colleagues and the public in general are required not only to ensure you keep on the cutting edge of the law but also for marketing purposes. 

Today, the World Wide Web is as acceptable as the golf course for legitimate networking and collegial interaction. You’ll also find that lawyers are now increasingly found on LinkedIn (the professional’s version of Facebook or an electronic rolodex if you will). You can find me on there along with many of my Hull & Hull LLP colleagues. It is nice to know that whether you like to wear golf shoes or slippers while networking, the choice is yours. 

There are some excellent law blogs out there and if you’d like to see just how many lawyers are blogging as proof of my claim, check out  this website  where you will find blogs on almost every legal topic imaginable (that was a challenge to think up one that isn’t covered yet)!

Stay tuned for tomorrow’s blog when I will point you to some interesting blogs you may find of use including a blog specifically designed to help lawyers avoid risk. Very clever…..

Happy Monday!

Sharon Davis - Click here for more information on Sharon Davis.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Collaborative Practice is a concept and practice that for some time has been familiar to and used by family law lawyers in Ontario (since about 2000), but to date has not formed part of any estate lawyer’s practice.  This may be changing soon. 

On April 7, 2010 an information session is being offered to estates lawyers, where the nuts and bolts of Collaborative Law will be shown, together with how it might apply in an estates practice - whether as a litigator or an estate planner.

Collaborative Practice Toronto’s website and The Collaborative Family Lawyers of Canada website are helpful places to look if you want to learn more about this unique model being applied in the family law context.  These sites note certain objectives, components and benefits to such an approach, which include:

·         resolve family law disputes without going to court or threatening to go to court (spouses and both collaborative lawyers sign a contract agreeing not to go to court);

·         find and focus on your common interests;

·         remain focused on the best interests of children;

·         understand each other's concerns;

·         ensure full and complete disclosure of all important information;

·         negotiate in a principled, dignified and respectful manner;

·         use informal discussions and conferences to settle all issues;

·         explore as many options for settlement as possible;

·         reach creative resolutions that best meet the goals and priorities of the individual family; and

·         spend less time and money to settle matters (this practice is generally less expensive than litigation).

There are certainly differences between the dynamics and factors at play in estates disputes versus family law matters. It will be interesting to see if this practice will be formally introduced in the estates bar and, if so, whether it will be a workable and beneficial mechanism for all concerned. 

Have a good day,

Natalia R. Angelini - Click here for more information on Natalia Angelini

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

In Re Estate of John Mitchell, the Endorsement of The Honourable Justice Brown clarifies expectations of the court in respect of requests for increased costs on unopposed applications to pass accounts, as the Rules of Civil Procedure contain some ambiguity in this regard.

His Honour notes that Rule 74.18 specifies the materials that must be filed initially on an application to pass accounts and where the application will be unopposed and proceed without a hearing. 

However, the Rule does not expressly stipulate the materials that should be filed where the application will proceed unopposed, but with a request for increased costs so that a hearing must be held. His Honour states that the applicant should ensure that the following materials are filed with the court in such situations:      

·                    proper initial application materials: Rule 74.18(1);

·                    a supplementary application record containing materials specified by Rule 74.18(9);

·                    additional evidence (a simple affidavit) that contains:

·                    the request for increased costs in proper form;

·                    proof of service of the request on all affected parties;

·                    a statement explaining the responses of affected parties to the request; and

·                    the details of and the reasons for the request, either through a detailed bill of costs or an easily understandable copy of the relevant dockets.

His Honour also stresses the importance of this last requirement, as a court cannot conduct a review of the request to ensure it is fair and reasonable without evidence describing the work performed, the time spent, the value of the work or the cost of such work.  Adequate evidence is essential.

Have a good day,

Natalia R. Angelini - Click here for more information on Natalia Angelini

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

I came across an interesting article by John Archer in the Gazette about real-estate investing in the U.S. Mr. Archer warns that while it has become a buyers' market, real-estate investing in the U.S. can leave Canadian speculators and leisure-property owners exposed to a variety of problems. Notably, this is what the article details as things to consider:

·                    Prices - in spite of the drop in property values, there remains a lot on the market at a wide range of price levels; the slump may last into 2011, so you may not want to buy too early;

·                    Insurance – inquire into home insurance costs when calculating overall affordability (e.g. the frequency of hurricanes attacking the Florida coast has lead to higher insurance premiums for seaside properties);

·                    The dollar – while the Canadian dollar is nearing par with the U.S. dollar, keep in mind the possibility of our currency declining, and the impact of expenses such as condo fees and property taxes etc. no longer being as affordable;

·                    Liquidity – consider whether your prospective new property can be easily sold; if not, your estate may be left with an asset that is difficult to sell, which could delay the administration;

·                    Taxes – as a departure from the norm, there are no U.S. estate taxes in 2010 (legislators are pondering this issue); pay attention to developments in this area;

·                    Probate fees – probate fees in some states also might be applied to the property upon your death; consult with your cross-border tax adviser, and ensure that you have a valid will and power of attorney that address your U.S. property (preferably drafted in the state where it is located); and

·                    Rental cost - if you rent out the property, you will be subject to U.S. income tax on the U.S. rental income; this might mean an additional accounting expense to file dual tax returns.

In spite of all this, Mr. Archer notes one neat tax angle when buying a property in the U.S.  It could still qualify as your principle residence for the purpose of using the principle residence exemption, as long as the usual criteria are met, which could result in a reduction or elimination of capital gain tax.

Have a good day,

Natalia Angelini

Natalia R. Angelini - Click here for more information on Natalia Angelini.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

The notion of being buried alive has no doubt been the subject of suspense thrillers and horror films past, probably because it generates the reaction movie makers want – fear. 

Well, this fictional terror almost became a reality for a 45 year-old Colombian woman recently declared dead of a heart attack. Luckily for her, she moved one of her arms just as an undertaker was about to embalm her.

The patient has multiple sclerosis, and was admitted to hospital a couple of days earlier after a heart attack.  Reportedly, she survived for several hours on life support, but then seemingly didn't respond to resuscitation efforts following a second attack.  She was declared dead not long after that.

A few hours after the pronouncement, a funeral home employee was about to inject embalming fluid into her body when he saw her move. He stopped the procedure and brought her back to the hospital to be treated.  

The reported medical opinion is that on rare occasions a person's heart rate and breathing can drop to undetectable levels, leading doctors to erroneously declare a patient dead. Pretty scary stuff!

Being buried alive would definitely be ranked up there with one of my worst nightmare scenarios.  Thankfully this woman was spared a similar fate! 

Don’t think I’ll be watching any horror flicks this weekend,   

Natalia Angelini

Natalia R. Angelini - Click here for more information on Natalia Angelini.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Although it seems that I hear of a new tale of familial strife weekly in this practice, I still find myself surprised and saddened to learn of each new account. One such case takes us to England, where it was recently reported that the daughters of a millionaire farmer are accused by their brothers to have plied their father with whisky and sleeping tablets before making him sign a Will leaving the sisters £600,000. At the time, their father, 89, was apparently grieving for his wife, who had died days earlier after a 65-year marriage. He was also possibly suffering from Alzheimer's.

The brothers’ version of events paints a picture of a man in a weakened condition being taken advantage of in a grief-stricken state. In contrast, the sisters explain that their father was a stubborn man who knew what he was doing and who wanted to treat all his children equally (he had already apparently left land worth an equivalent amount to his sons).

Both sides called expert medical witnesses, with doctors offering different opinions over the testator’s capacity. In addition, others close to the deceased gave evidence of their observations of him. Notably, the Will was drawn up by a solicitor who had acted for the father for many years, who testified that he had the necessary capacity and knew and approved of the Will’s contents. 

If the brothers’ case is successful, the court will uphold a prior Will in which they will inherit most of the £1.2million estate. Their sisters, in contrast, will each receive only £15,000.

While the outcome of this case is not yet known, to me it highlights the importance of gathering evidence to support one’s position in this type of litigation. As a deceased loved one is unable to offer up assistance from the grave, medical evidence, lawyer’s evidence and the evidence of people close to a testator are often all necessary to help put the pieces of the puzzle together.

Have a good day,

Natalia Angelini

Natalia R. Angelini - Click here for more information on Natalia Angelini.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

In Ontario, the law is that a Will is revoked by marriage (for exceptions, see section 16 of the Succession Law Reform Act (SLRA)). 

If after a testator makes a Will he or she divorces or the marriage is declared a nullity, (a) a gift in a Will of property to one’s former spouse; (b) an appointment of one’s former spouse as executor or trustee; and (c) the conferring of a general or special power of appointment on one’s former spouse, are revoked. The Will is construed as if the former spouse had died before the testator (see section 17(2) of the SLRA). Notably, this law does not apply if a contrary intention appears in the Will.

Divorced couples (or the other beneficiaries under their Will) can take comfort in knowing that they won't be surprised by having a gift no longer intended for a former spouse honoured, which could otherwise reduce the entitlement of others named in the Will.   

As reported in the February 2010 edition of Will Power, until not so long ago the common law in Nova Scotia lead to a very different result.  A gift by Will to one’s spouse was construed prima facie to refer to the person to whom the individual was married at the time the Will was made, unless circumstances showed that a future spouse was intended. If the individual was later divorced or the marriage was later annulled, this event had no effect on the gift made in the Will. To the likely chagrin of the divorced testator, unless the Will was changed after the divorce, his or her former spouse would still get the gift on the testator's death.

That has all changed with the coming into force of section 19A of the Nova Scotia Wills Act. This legislation brings the law in Nova Scotia in line with that of Ontario and some other provinces. It is good to see growing uniformity being applied in Canada on this issue.

Enjoy the rest of your day,

Natalia Angelini

Natalia R. Angelini - Click here for more information on Natalia Angelini.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Without understanding what the term “social media” is, it can sound intimidating to those in our industry who are not computer literate. But what is social media? Wikipedia defines social media as “media which are formed mainly by the public as a group, in a social way, rather than media produced by journalists, editors and media conglomerates." In an article, composed by Gary Edgar of LawPro, he defines social media as anyone looking to engage, connect and network with others online.

Gary Edgar does point out that one thing social media is not, is a fad.   Social Media is fundamentally changing the ways we interact and communicate with others and it will be interesting to see how this form of media continues to evolve. 

Social networks can be used to learn, exchange ideas and collaborate on projects. I have participated in numerous forums where I have learned how to troubleshoot many problems that I may have encountered with my automobile and computer, moreover, I have also learned neat little tips on some home renovations.  Social Media can also be used as a form of marketing. As Gary Edgar points out in his article, 15-20 years ago, the options for self promotion were limited to newspaper ads, the yellow pages, a radio or TV. Now with the concept of social media, our options have multiplied and the costs for self promotion have been drastically reduced.

However, the social media world is not the flawless paradise that we all would like it to be. There have been instances of online imposters, questions as to how much of my real life persona should I share online, how many people are seeing the things I post and who owns the information that is placed online?  These are all very important questions that will become clearer as this form of media continues to evolve.

Until next time,

Rick Bickhram

Rick Bickhram - Click here for more information on Rick Bickhram.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

This is by far my favourite time of year. The holiday parties are in full swing, I am eating sweets and miniature puff pastries on what seems like a daily basis, and my birthday is around the corner.  Well, truth be told there is not that much to celebrate about my getting older at this point, but any excuse to continue the festivities is fine by me!

Birthdays and hallmarks like Christmas and New Years are great annual reminders to review your estate plan and to see if any changes need to be made to, for instance, account for a new or pending marriage, divorce, birth or death etc. 

Today is the last day I will be blogging until the New Year. So I just wanted to thank everyone for reading and for staying in tune with our blog and podcasts this year. We certainly enjoy doing them. 

Have a wonderful holiday season!

Natalia Angelini

Natalia R. Angelini - Click here for more information on Natalia Angelini.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

The Rules of Civil Procedure are a wonderful resource, and provide guidance as to, among other things, the types of applications that can be brought when someone wants to have an estate trustee appointed in Ontario in unusual circumstances. For instance:

(a)               where there is an estate trustee appointed with or without a Will in the United Kingdom or in a province in Canada (outside of Ontario), an application is to be made for Confirmation by Resealing of Appointment of Estate Trustee;

(b)               where there is a foreign estate trustee and no Will, an application is to be made for a Certificate of Appointment of Foreign Estate Trustee’s Nominee as Estate Trustee Without a Will; and

(c)               where there is a foreign estate trustee with a Will, and the applicant was appointed by a court having jurisdiction outside Ontario, other than a jurisdiction referred to in (a) above, an application is to be made for a Certificate of Ancillary Appointment of Estate Trustee.

What the Rules don’t speak to, however, is when you have a Will and a foreign grant of probate with a Will, but no estate trustee is named in the Will or appointed in the foreign grant.   I would imagine this is a rare occurrence, yet I am currently facing that very situation.  

I have chosen to address this situation by applying for an ancillary grant, as that seems to be the closest applicable Rule to this fact scenario. However, the application is being accompanied by a motion record wherein we explain the circumstances of our case and seek a court order that a person in Ontario (an individual or trust company, as the case may be) be granted a Certificate of Ancillary Appointment of Estate Trustee. 

I hope this will satisfy the court, and will let you know the results!

Have a great day,

Natalia Angelini

Natalia R. Angelini - Click here for more information on Natalia Angelini.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

At the recent Estates and Trusts Summit, the Children's Lawyer (Debra L. Stephens) gave us some insight into her office's view about the “do’s and don’ts” for counsel when preparing guardianship applications, including the following:

·                    Do – provide a rationale as to why the appointment of a guardian to manage the minor’s assets is better than transferring the assets to the Accountant of the Superior Court of Justice;

·                    Don’t – forget that the guardian’s investment options are restricted by the Trustee Act (s. 27) if nothing is stated in the plan about investments;

·                    Do – bring the application to the right court e.g. if a plan provides for payments out of the assets other than reasonable management fees and expenses, only the Superior Court of Justice (not The Ontario Court of Justice) has the authority to approve the plan;

·                    Don’t – forget that all appointed guardians are jointly and severally liable for their management of the minor’s property;

·                    Do – teach your client about the duty and complexity of accounting for his/her actions as guardian;

·                    Don’t – bring the application prematurely e.g. in a custody dispute the appointment of a guardian should only be made after custody issues are resolved;

·                    Do – address the need for a bond and the evidentiary basis for any request to dispense with it;

·                    Don’t – forget to take into account risk tolerance and the investment horizon when preparing the plan of care and management; and

·                    Do – address professional fees of an investment advisor and compensation.

You can get a more comprehensive read of these “do’s and don’ts” by reading Ms. Stephens’ paper entitled “Stuff” the OCL thinks is more interesting than the recession, which addresses guardianships, selling property, annuities, trust property, separation agreements and more.

Have a good day,

Natalia Angelini

Natalia R. Angelini - Click here for more information on Natalia Angelini.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

It is always a learning experience when going to court, and reading Paul J. Pape’s perspective on how he prepares for advocacy in the Court of Appeal will surely be of help to me when appearing in appellate court, or any court for that matter. I found some of his noteworthy insights to be:

·                    Imagine your mother as the adjudicator – if you can’t convince her of the righteousness of your position, you will not persuade the court:

·                    judges are swayed by the same considerations as ordinary people - a sense of humanity and justice will likely appeal to the panel;

·                    take a common sense approach, as judges try to solve matters by taking a practical approach;

·                    capture the court’s attention - tell a story, not an argument or submission;

·                    focus on the facts, this is more interesting - appeals, like trials, are determined on them;

·                    the court knows the law better than we do - the law should in many cases play a minimal role;

·                    be brief, and tell the story in simple terms – be specific and detailed, but keep the facts to those that advance the tale;

·                    there is always only one issue, was the result just – keep this as your focus; and

·                    anticipate the court’s questions and welcome them.

I did not have space here to address more of Mr. Pape’s commentary and tips on how to prepare your factum and compendium, so I would recommend reading his article, which can be found in the Winter 2009 issue of The Advocates’ Journal.

Have a great day,

Natalia Angelini

Natalia R. Angelini - Click here for more information on Natalia Angelini.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

The concept of reviving a revoked will seems clear enough.  But what is the difference between a revival and a republication, and why does it matter? 

Revival means reactivating a revoked will.  Note that section 19(1) of Ontario's Succession Law Reform Act requires a revival to be in accordance with the provisions of Part I of the Act.  So an oral declaration that a revoked will is valid does not suffice.  A destroyed will cannot be revived, unless the reviving instrument contains a copy or the terms.  On the other hand, at Common Law, a codicil referencing an existing will "republishes" that will, furnishing evidence of the testator's considering his will as then existing.  And because the Wills Act, 1837 did not abolish the doctrine of republication, the principle still operates.  Both revived and republished wills are deemed executed on the revival or republication date. 

An attempt to revive a will that was never actually revoked may have the result of republishing that will at the time of the attempted revival.  However, attempting to republish a revoked will not revive a revoked will, unless the acts of republication also satisfy the requirements of a revival (which include the form requirements of the Succession Law Reform Act.  Specific uses of the doctrine of republication are discussed in detail in Macdonell, Sheard and Hull on Probate Practice, 4th ed., Rodney Hull, Q.C. and Ian M. Hull (Carswell: Toronto, 1996), pp. 116-119. 

Have a good day,

Chris Graham

Christopher M.B. Graham - Click here for more information on Chris Graham.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

In a captivating article authored by Kent Sepkowitz, an infectious-disease specialist at a Cancer Center in New York City, he recounts the practical difficulties when someone dies at home - doing it yourself can be thorny and chaotic without the administrative help of Hospitals.

Specifically, when someone dies at home, a licensed professional must determine that the person is indeed dead.  While this should be arranged in advance with the doctor, the timing may not ultimately work out.  If no doctor is available, the other option is to call an ambulance…for a dead person.  There are reportedly other annoyances as well, including:

·                    the death certificate must be completed in black ink (using only certain approved diagnoses);

·                    an undertaker needs to be selected; and

·                    law enforcement must be called to establish that no foul play occurred – not an investigation anyone wants to deal with after just losing a loved one.

Mr. Sepkowitz notes that, with the active support of hospice care, savings could come from facilitating the wishes of those who choose to die at home.  He also considers what is likely the more important benefit of assuring tranquility and dignity for the person dying and their family.

Thanks for reading and have a great weekend!

Natalia Angelini

Natalia Angelini - Click here for more information on Natalia Angelini.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Hugh Lawford, co-founder of Quicklaw - the world's first online legal database - recently passed away.  

As noted in Mr. Lawford’s obituary, he created the project at Queen's University in 1967 when he realized that legal documents could be computerized and made available in a database. This insight led to his creation of QUICKLAW Inc. together with Professor Richard von Briesen in 1973.

Mr. Lawford spent virtually the next thirty years dividing his time between teaching law at Queen's University and building QUICKLAW into a household name in the legal community. It was a system that without a doubt revolutionized the practice of law, putting an end to long days of cumbersome legal research.  

In 2002, QUICKLAW was sold to LexisNexis. By that time, it had over 200 employees in a dozen offices in North America.

Some of Mr. Lawford’s other noteworthy achievements are:

·                    He was chosen as Rhodes Scholar for Alberta in 1955.

·                    He obtained his Bachelor of Civil Law degree from Oxford University.

·                    Returning to Canada, he joined the new Law Faculty at Queen's University in Kingston, Ontario, and became Queen's youngest Associate Professor, teaching International and Administrative Law; and

·                    He was Special Assistant for a time, first to the President of the Privy Council and then to the Prime Minister.

An interesting article on his life can be found in the Globe and Mail.

Have a great day,

Natalia

Natalia Angelini - Click here for more information on Natalia Angelini.
 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

The Chicago Tribune provides an interesting commentary on a recent decision of the Illinois Supreme Court, which ruled that a Jewish couple could legally disinherit any grandchildren who married outside their faith, as long as the method of doing so did not encourage divorce. 

The facts giving rise to the case are that the husband discovered that his grandson was taking a gentile to the junior prom.  The husband wrote his strong feelings about religious loyalty into his Will.  Specifically, his Will indicated that upon his wife’s death their grandchildren would become lifetime beneficiaries of certain trusts. However, if any of them married outside the faith and their non-Jewish spouse did not convert to Judaism within a year, they would not receive their share of the trusts.

The husband predeceased the wife. The wife came up with a slightly different approach in her Will.  She bequeathed $250,000 to the one grandchild who had married within the faith. Those who did not do so received nothing.  

One of the disinherited grandchildren argued that the clause violated public policy by offering money to practice a particular religion.  The court disagreed, pointing out that the wife did not set up a system that encouraged heirs to divorce and remarry to claim an inheritance.  Rather, she made a bequest to reward those grandchildren whose lives embraced the values she and her husband cherished.

Thanks for reading,                                                                                                       

Natalia

Natalia Angelini - Click here for more information on Natalia Angelini.
 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Hull & Hull LLP hosted its quarterly breakfast series on September 24, 2009.   Megan Connolly started off the day with a very informative talk on charitable gifts, with a focus on when a charitable beneficiary can not be identified or cannot be found. 

Megan reviewed ways in which the charitable gift may survive in these circumstances, which are touched upon below.

·                    When the charity is inaccurately described, but the description is sufficient to make it clear to which charity the gift was intended and the beneficiary is discoverable, the gift will not fail;  

·                    When the institution can still be identified, although its form might have changed (i.e. unification of churches), then the court will often be willing to give effect to the gift – a key consideration is whether the charity has maintained a “continuing identity”;

·                    When it is impossible or impracticable to carry out the gift (i.e. the named institution ceased to exist during the testator’s lifetime) an application for the advice direction of the court can be brought on the basis of the cy-près doctrine; and

·                    Section 13 of the Charities Accounting Act provides a mechanism for obtaining a cy-près order without having to commence a formal court proceeding when the consent is obtained of the Public Guardian and Trustee and everyone else required to be served with such an application.

An interesting panel discussion followed between Ian Hull and Suzana Popovic-Montag on undue influence, which is seen to be the most difficult ground upon which to successfully challenge a Will.

If you would like to receive a copy of the papers on these topics please contact us.

Have a great day,              

Natalia Angelini

Natalia Angelini - Click here for more information on Natalia Angelini.
 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

The Toronto International Film Festival brought stars to town and brought an estate issue into focus. The Art of the Steal  received accolades as a “thrilling whodunit” about the world-renowned Barnes art collection, valued in the “billions and billions.” Dr. Albert Barnes assembled art in the twenties and housed it in the suburb of Merion, Pennsylvania.

On his death in 1951, Dr. Barnes’ will gave control of the collection to the trustees of Lincoln University, the first black university in the United States. However, according to the film’s producer, in the nineties, a scheme was hatched to permanently remove the collection from Merion that some would later call the heist of the century.

The trustees’ decision to move the exhibit to downtown Philadelphia was met with legal challenges that did not succeed.  On a site called The Barnes Letters  it seems interest groups used the courts to deviate from Dr. Barnes’ express wishes to focus on “an educational organization designed to promulgate a unique way of teaching art appreciation.”

At an opening ceremony for the new site, protestors marked the occasion with signs advocating that Barnes’ “…Will Should Be Honoured.”

Art disputes relating to trusts and foundations are not uncommon. Here in Canada, one example involves a long-standing legal dispute between the U.K. Beaverbrook Foundation which claims that it only loaned art to a New Brunswick gallery – art that originally belonged to New Brunswick newspaper baron Max Aitken.  (See Paul Trudelle's September 14, 2009 blog).

These examples point to the idea that a testator’s expressed wishes for certain assets may not always be respected. Dr. Barnes wanted his art to stay put, while it was alleged that Lord Beaverbrook’s art was gifted to the people of New Brunswick.

Have a good Monday.

Jonathan Morse

Jonathan Morse - Click here for more information on Jonathan Morse.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Part V of Ontario's Succession Law Reform Act ("SLRA") establishes a mechanism whereby qualifying dependants can claim support from the estate of a deceased.  Section 72 of the SLRA is a deeming provision that includes certain non-estate assets as part of the estate for the purposes of calculating the value of the estate, and allows such assets to be charged ("clawed back") by a support Order made under section 63 of the SLRA. 

The recent case of Simson v. De Bartolo 2009 CanLII 38493 (ON S.C.) interprets section 72(1) and applies Cummings v. Cummings 2004 CanLII 9339 (ON C.A.), the Court of Appeals decision holding that support awards are subject to moral considerations.  One issue following Cummings has been whether moral considerations justify a support award in and of themselves, or whether moral considerations are merely relevant to quantum of support following a determination that a support award is appropriate.

The applicant in Simson v. De Bartolo was litigation guardian for her child, born out of wedlock to the deceased and the actual support claimant.  When the applicant told the deceased's wife about their relationship and the child, the deceased transferred these properties to his wife (from joint ownership) and made a will disinheriting the child.  Later, the deceased died virtually penniless.  At issue in a motion was whether properties transferred by the deceased to his wife 10 years prior to his death could be deemed part of the deceased's estate under any enumerated grounds in section 72(1). 

Justice Lemon held that these assets could not be "clawed back" under s. 72(1).  Most particularly, a transfer of land to another party in the absence of an express written trust instrument does not fall within section 72(1)(e).  Of course, the transfer may still be impressed with a trust, as Justice Lemon pointed out, and if such trust pulls the asset into the estate, the SLRA provides for protection of the dependant pursuant to section 67.  Moral considerations were relevant in determining quantum of support, but not whether an asset forms part of the estate.

The facts in Simson v. De Bartolo appear to have precluded the court from addressing the Cummings question, at least in the motion being heard.  However, section 72 has been clarified.

Enjoy your day,

Chris Graham

Chris M.B. Graham - Click here for more information on Chris Graham.

null

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

CNN recently reported disturbing events, whereby employees at a historic cemetery near Chicago allegedly dug up more than 300 graves as part of a conspiracy to resell burial plots to unsuspecting buyers.  

Reportedly, at least four people are in custody facing a slew of felony charges. Additionally, investigators are in the process of attempting to determine the scope of the scheme. It may not be an easy task since, among other things, it is possible that the employees doctored records to conceal the scheme.   They are expected to use thermal imaging to assist their efforts, and have brought in forensic scientists to help.

While most of the excavations reportedly occurred in back lots, where the plots were older and not frequently visited, they are not certain of this. Other plots may have been disturbed as well.

Investigators are faced with the unenviable task of trying to find the families of those whose graves were disinterred, as well as those people who unknowingly purchased occupied plots. 

A sad day indeed….

Natalia Angelini

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Given the nature of estate litigation, a party to the dispute, and/or a witness that is to testify at trial, are at times elderly, in poor health, incapable of testifying or out of the jurisdiction, such that it is appropriate for their evidence to be given out of court in advance of the trial date. Rule 36 of the Rules of Civil Procedure regulates taking of evidence before trial. 

A person may be examined under this Rule either by consent of the parties or with leave of the court. The court is to take into account several factors when determining whether to grant leave to order an examination before trial, which are particularized in Rule 36. These include the convenience of the witness and saving of costs. This permits the court to take a more broad approach, since previously these orders were limited to situations where it was established that the witness will likely be out of the jurisdiction or incapable of testifying.  

Moreover, previously, leave of the court was necessary before the examination of a witness could be used at trial. Now, the transcript or videotape of the examination of a witness who is not a party may be used “unless the court orders otherwise”, and the witness shall not be called to give evidence at trial except with leave of the court. In contrast, the transcript or videotape of the examination of a witness who is a party may not be used except with leave of the court or the agreement of the parties.

While it seems to me that live testimony will likely have more impact then a transcript or videotape, if the circumstances warrant it, this is a handy tool to avoid difficulties and complications in attempting to get witnesses and/or parties on the stand when the trial date arrives, and ensures the evidence is preserved and gets before the court.  

Have a great day,

Natalia Angelini

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

As noted in one of my earlier blogs, gone are the days where estate litigants almost automatically were awarded their costs out of the estate. The trend in recent years has adopted elements of the loser- pays philosophy, which has long been applied to other types of litigation. 

Moreover, parties in estate matters who conduct themselves in such a manner that serves to protract and unnecessarily increase the costs of litigation can more and more often find themselves penalized with a cost award.

This trend is no more clearly seen than in Teffer v. Schaefers, a recent decision of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice, where an estate trustee was Ordered to personally pay more than half of the legal costs awarded to the various other parties due to his conduct in the litigation.

That said, less than 25% of the aggregate legal costs sought were actually awarded (although I understand further submissions are being made).  This result is indicative of another noteworthy trend that we are seeing in estate matters. That is, judges are increasingly exercising their discretion to ensure cost awards are subject to the overriding principle of fairness and reasonableness in light of all the circumstances of each particular case, as well as proportionate to the amount at issue (in addition to being reflective of the factors set out in Rule 57.01(1) of the Rules of Civil Procedure).

This decision should serve as a caution to anyone involved in estate litigation – costs (even to the victor) are not guaranteed! 

Have a great day,

Natalia Angelini

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

In estate litigation it is not uncommon for one or more disputing parties to be under disability. Unless the court or a statute provide otherwise, a party under disability must be represented by a litigation guardian (see Rule 7 of the Rules of Civil Procedure, which regulates proceedings by or against parties under disability). 

Someone can act as the litigation guardian for a plaintiff (or applicant) by filing an affidavit with the court, the required contents of which are set out in Rule 7.

In the case of a defendant (or respondent) who is a minor, the Children’s Lawyer shall act as the litigation guardian, unless the court orders otherwise.

In contrast, in the case of a defendant who is an adult, aside for a few exceptions set out in the Rule, no one can act as a litigation guardian until appointed by the court. The evidence that must be filed in support of the motion for such appointment is also particularized in the Rule.

Some other noteworthy provisions in Rule 7 are:

·                    a litigation guardian other than the Children’s Lawyer or the Public Guardian and Trustee must be represented by a lawyer;

·                    a litigation guardian shall diligently attend to the interests of the person under disability and take all steps necessary for the protection of those interests, including the commencement and conduct of a counterclaim, crossclaim or third party claim;

·                    where it appears to the court that a litigation guardian is not acting in the best interests of the party under disability, the court may substitute the Children’s Lawyer, the Public Guardian and Trustee or any other person as litigation guardian; and

·                    no settlement of a claim made by or against a person under disability, whether or not a proceeding has been commenced in respect of the claim, is binding on the person without the approval of a judge.

Have a great day,

Natalia Angelini

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

The sudden death of Michael Jackson has sent a shock-wave of sadness across the globe. I expect it will be some time before you can tune in to various media without seeing coverage on it. 

I find myself drawn in to the discussion, which one of my colleagues also blogged on last week.  His commentary focused on the expected complex administration of Jackson’s estate, given both his sizeable assets and debts. This blog focuses on one aspect of the human element of the tragedy, sparked by Jackson’s Will. 

As noted in a recent New York Times Article, in his Will Diana Ross is appointed as the guardian for Jackson’s children if his mother is no longer willing or able to fulfill that role. 

In Ontario, a custody or guardianship appointment by Will is not determinative of the issue. It only has a temporary effect, in that any appointment for custody or guardianship expires ninety-days after such appointment becomes effective (i.e. ninety-days from the date of death in this case) (see section 61(7) of the Children’s Law Reform Act). 

However, if the appointee applies to the court for custody or guardianship within the ninety-day period, the appointment expires when the application is disposed of.   While each case is usually fact-specific, I would expect that a testator’s wishes set out in his/her Will is a factor a court would give significant weight to when considering such an application.

In Jackson’s case this issue is already a live one, with potentially several people vying for custody and/or guardianship. It will be interesting to see who ends up being the primary caregiver(s) of his young children.

Have a great day,

Natalia Angelini

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Today’s blog is a continuation of my blogs this week addressing some aspects of preparation for a trial in a contested passing. I briefly touch upon transcripts, the Request to Admit and Witnesses today.

It is important in preparing for trial to review the transcripts of the examinations conducted to assist counsel with locating evidence in the transcripts during trial, including admissions and/or inconsistent statements made by a witness at trial, to address the completeness of questions on the examinations, and whether additional discovery is needed before trial.

If a damages brief is to be provided by the opposing party as a result of an undertaking at examinations or otherwise, ensure that it has been provided.

A party may also, further to Rule 51.02 of the Rules of Civil Procedure, at any time, by serving a Request to Admit, request any other party to admit, for the purposes of the proceeding only, the truth of a fact or the authenticity of a document. A copy of any document mentioned in the Request to Admit shall, where practicable be served with the request (unless a copy is already in the possession of the other party).

The opposing party must respond to the Request to Admit within 20 days, failing which the opposing party will be deemed to admit the truth of the facts asserted in the Request to Admit or the authenticity of the documents referred to in the Request to Admit. As such, the Request to Admit should be served at least 20 days before the commencement of the trial, and quite some time before that, if possible, so that counsel will know what facts need not be proved or the authenticity of documents that will not need to be proved.

There may be cost consequences if a party refuses to admit the truth of a fact or authenticate documents which are proven or authenticated during the trial.

Requests to Admit may be effective to: (i) reduce the facts in dispute, (ii) reduce the number of witnesses to be called and/or the examination of a witness, (iii) minimize the costs and length of the trial, and (iv) avoid having to authenticate documents.

With respect to witnesses, amongst other things, it is helpful to make a witness list of anticipated witnesses for each of the parties, prepare a chart of the issues/documents to be proved by each witness and identify and consider the concerns, evidentiary or not, with the evidence and documents to be dealt with by each witness. If the witnesses are experts, Rule 53 of the Rules of Civil Procedure is applicable. Summons to Witness need to be considered (Rule 53.04) as well as whether an Order excluding witnesses is necessary (Rule 52.06).

Thanks for reading.

Craig

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

The growth in Canada’s aging population has led to increased awareness of the special needs of seniors and the impact of the law on them. Our blogs have often dealt with issues that particularly affect the elderly, such as power of attorney abuse. In a previous blog, I noted the rise of a new practice specialty, elder law, to deal with the multi-faceted legal needs of the elderly. 

The Advocacy Centre for the Elderly (ACE) is a longstanding community legal clinic that has been at the forefront of elder law since 1984. ACE specializes in providing legal services to low income seniors in Ontario and promoting access to justice for the elderly. Through its work, ACE has developed expertise in issues affecting older persons, such as elder abuse and exploitation, mental capacity and consent, patients’ rights in hospitals and other institutions, and substitute decision making. 

ACE is currently working with the Law Commission of Ontario (LCO) to research the best ways to enforce the rights of older adults residing in institutional settings, such as hospitals, long-term care homes and retirement homes. Older adults, including residents in institutional settings, are too often denied access to justice due to lack of awareness of legal rights, discrimination based on age, and financial and physical obstacles in trying to access the legal system. ACE’s goal is to develop an ‘access to justice model’ that will promote the autonomy and dignity of older adults residing in institutions, and ensure that their complaints are heard and successfully resolved. ACE’s work is part of a broader multi-year project by the LCO to develop a new framework to analyze and understand the impact of law on older persons. 

For more information about ACE, see their website at www.advocacycentreelderly.org. More information about the LCO’s project on older adults can be found on their website at www.lco-cdo.org.

Have a great day!

Bianca La Neve

• Email This
• Print
• Share Link

I couldn’t help but do a double-take when I came across an interesting article in the Globe and Mail by Anne McIlroy with the above-captioned title. 

Ms. McIllroy comments on the latest advances in stem-cell research, which indicate that it may be possible for someone to become a biological single parent - the source of both the egg and the sperm! 

How it seems to work is that adult skin cells can be turned into stem cells, and once they have been reprogrammed, these cells can be turned into many of the specialized cells that make up the human body. If some of the reprogrammed stem cells were transformed into sperm, and others into eggs, together they could be used to create an embryo. 

It hasn’t happened yet, but the possibility has made this a hot topic.   While it may be a discussion the Canadian legislature is not yet prepared to engage in (we have one of the more restrictive laws governing stem cell research), I would expect that if and when things change, advancements such as this will have widespread impact. 

I wonder how it can affect the estate planning area: Would it simplify estate planning by carving out spousal bequests and/or claims? Would it impact on how children of a testator are defined and/or treated? Would it increase the strength of a dependant support claim by the biological single parent child versus that of a competing child born with two biological parents?

I find the concept of biological single parenthood to be bizarre, unnatural and a little scary.  But perhaps I'm just too much of a traditionalist to keep up with this rapidly changing world of ours. 

Have a great weekend!

Natalia

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

You would expect that a minor or a party to a proceeding who is declared mentally incapable to manage his/her property and/or personal care (under sections 6 and 45 of the Substitute Decisions Act) would not be able to or required to participate in the litigation.   However, this is not so. 

Pursuant to Rule 31.03 (5)(b) of the Rules of Civil Procedure, a party under “disability” (defined to include minors and mentally incapable adults) can be examined for discovery if he/she is "competent to give evidence".  

The onus of establishing incompetence rests on the party alleging it: Barnes v. Kirk, [1968] 2 O.R. 213 (C.A.).

Application of the Rule has led to varying decisions and approaches, a few of which I note below.

Mental Incapacity

·                    a party under disability may be examined if competent to give evidence subject to the discretion of the court to impose limits where the examination would be oppressive, vexatious or unnecessary: Nyilas v. Janos (1985), 50 C.P.C. 91 (Ont. Master);

·                    an appointment for discovery should be struck out on the grounds of unsoundness of mind only in the clearest cases – the preferable course is to allow the trial judge to rule on the admissibility of the examination and the credibility of the witness: McGowan v. Haslehurst (1977), 17 O.R. (2d) 440 (H.C.);

Minors

·                    the right to examine a minor for discovery is not absolute – the court should interview the child before exercising its discretion in that regard: Bennett v. Hartemink (1983), 42 C.P.C. 33 (Ont. H.C.);

·                    a defendant was denied the right to examine a ten-year-old plaintiff where it was found that the examination would result in psychological herm to the child: Kidd v. Lake (1998), 42 O.R. (3d) 312 (Gen. Div.); and

·                    the court permitted the examination of two plaintiffs (ages 16 and 11) notwithstanding evidence that it might cause serious psychological damage: Nyilas v. Janos, supra.

Have a great day,

Natalia

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Trusts can be varied or terminated prematurely in two ways: (1) through the operation of the rule in Saunders v. Vautier; and (2) under the powers of the court given by way of the Variation of Trusts Act.  There is also potentially a third method - by a trustee’s exercise of his absolute discretionary power given by the trust document.  

This third method begs the question: is a trustee’s discretion truly absolute? Debra L. Stephens, The Ontario Children’s Lawyer, comprehensively reviews this topic, several relevant authorities and the law in other jurisdictions in her paper given at The Six-Minute Estates Lawyer 2009, entitled "Trusts: When is a Termination a Variation?".

Ms. Stephens gleans the following principles from the authorities: that payment of all of the capital of a trust to the beneficiaries is an improper exercise of discretion where it is not in keeping with the primary intention of the settler. However, it can be justifiable where it appears the circumstances of the beneficiaries are such that payment would further, rather than frustrate, the settlor’s intentions.

Ms. Stephens also notes that the circumstances surrounding the exercise of discretion will have a large impact on its perceived propriety - each case will be examined on its unique facts i.e. the wording of the trust document, the needs of the beneficiaries and the value of the trust.

It is noteworthy that The Children’s Lawyer (Ontario) takes the position that a trustee’s “termination” of a trust is, in essence, a “variation” if there are contingent interests involved. As such, even if the discretion is absolute the trustee does not have the right to transfer the capital to beneficiaries without first giving notice to The Children’s Lawyer and securing court approval. 

Obtaining the necessary consents and court approval is something I agree with in every circumstance of a trust variation or termination by way of a trustee's exercise of his/her discretion.  It is surely the best way a trustee can avoid exposure to future litigation on the matter.

Have a great day,

Natalia Angelini

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Removing an attorney for property is notoriously difficult. A person should only seek to remove an attorney for property when clear and compelling evidence presents itself. 

Where you feel the circumstances necessitate the commencement of a removal application, I recommend that you consider the following practical and strategic evidence-gathering steps, which may add teeth to your claim:

·                    Compile a detailed list of the attorney’s misdeeds and inactions;

·                    Consider asking The Office of the Public Guardian and Trustee to investigate;

·                    Talk to neighbours and caregivers to gather critical information;

·                    Maintain regular contact with the incapable person and try to ascertain his/her wishes; and

·                    Ask the attorney for regular progress reports.

Finally, it is worth considering applying to the court for directions regarding the conduct of the attorney before embarking on a removal application. The court may implement conditions and/or restrictions on an attorney’s activities and may also provide guidance as to whether a removal application is warranted as a next step.

For more on this topic and power of attorney litigation generally, I suggest you read Ian Hull’s book, Power of Attorney Litigation, 2000, CCH Canadian Limited.

Have a great day,

Natalia Angelini

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Howard J. Feldman made a presentation on the circumstances where a net family property ("NFP") equalization can set aside an estate feeze.  He also discussed structuring the estate freeze transaction to qualify as an exclusion from the transferee child's NFP. 

To refresh: the classic estate freeze is a transaction involving a business-owning parent and his or her child.  The parent transfers the equity shares in the business to the child but retains control of the company through preferential shares ("prefs").  The prefs have a fixed redemption and liquidation value, so all capital growth is with the equity shares transferred to the child.  The parent "freezes" his own level of equity in the business, leaving future capital growth to the child.  The goal is to avoid the child receiving the equity in the company on the parent's death, because the capital gains tax liability would presumably have grown significantly.  Capital gains tax is payable when the parent transfers the shares under the estate freeze transaction, but presumably smaller than it would be on the parent's death.  

The problem is that an estate freeze during the transferor parent's marriage potentially removes assets from that parent's property for the purposes of the NFP equalization.  This can conflict with the philosophy of the NFP equalization payment, which is that marriage is a partnership and spouses' collective increase in net worth during the marriage should therefore be evenly divided between the spouses at the end of the marriage.  The parent's subsequent death or divorce can trigger a challenge by the spouse of the estate freeze. 

Among Mr. Feldman's points and recommendations:

• the form of the transaction and relevant documents is critical (see the paper for reasons)
• the solicitor must have a well-documented file and written instructions from the client, due to the risk of the transaction being challenged
• Declarations to Revenue Canada and financial institutions are not considered binding in family law
• a gift of shares under a corporate reorganization may not excluded where there is not family trust, but beware that sooner or later the leading cases may be overturned (with a plethora of qualifications and circumstances detailed in the paper)
• gifting shares or the cash to buy the shares are subject to numerous, complex considerations (no pun intended)

This barely scratches the surface of the summary and recommendations.  It is well-worth the read.  The entire Six-Minute Estates Lawyer 2009 program can be purchased here.

Have a good day,

Chris Graham

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

In a paper recently given by Mark Handelman, he comprehensively reviewed POA for PC, which document, he notes, is more often prepared as an afterthought to the Will and POA for Property package - too frequently granted without serious discussion between lawyer and client and between client and proposed attorneys.

A variety of noteworthy issues are covered in Mr. Handelman’s paper, including the following:

· the requirements of execution (i.e. required age of grantors and attorneys, as well as witness requirements and restrictions);

· when POA for PC become effective;

· revocation of POA for PC (i.e. capacity requirement and method and scope of revocation)

· the two tests (minimum) for a grantor's capacity that lawyers ought to turn their minds to (see the Substitute Decisions Act, s. 45; and Health Care Consent Act, s. 4(1));

· precautions to take when the grantor's capacity to execute a POA for PC is in question;

· special considerations, conditions, restrictions and instructions in POA for PC (i.e. authorizing use of force or restraint to place a grantor for treatment) and special processes for them to be effective; and

· advance directives in POA for PC (i.e. to give or refuse consent to a particular care plan) and the enforcement of same.

If you are interested in reading more on this topic, you can find Mr. Handelman’s paper by contacting the Ontario Bar Association.

Have a great weekend!

Natalia Angelini

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

When advancing a dependant support claim, it is important to determine where the deceased person was domiciled[1] at death.

Under the former dependants’ relief legislation (Dependants’ Relief Act, R.S.O. 1970, c. 126) the court could only make orders for dependant support in cases where the deceased died domiciled in Ontario. In contrast, under the Succession Law Reform Act (SLRA), courts in Ontario have the jurisdiction to also make such orders for support where the deceased died domiciled outside of Ontario.

The issue becomes one of jurisdiction – what assets will the Ontario courts have authority over? In brief, the answer appears to be as follows:

-          if the deceased person was not domiciled in Ontario, then the jurisdiction of the Ontario court will be limited to real property/immovables in Ontario;

-          if the deceased was domiciled in Ontario, and a support application was brought in Ontario, the court has jurisdiction to charge the movables of the deceased worldwide; and

-          even if the deceased person was domiciled in Ontario at death, an Ontario court order directing support for a dependant may not be enforced over real property/immovables located outside Ontario, such that the dependant may be forced to bring an application in the jurisdiction where this property is located in order to obtain the relief granted in the Ontario court order.

In Corina Weigl’s paper entitled “Conflicts of Laws in the Context of Dependant’s Relief – A Matter of Domicile”, presented at the Ontario Bar Association 2009 Institute of Continuing Legal Education, she discusses this and other related issues in greater depth. A worthwhile read!

Have a great day,

Natalia Angelini

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

The Succession Law Reform Act permits dependant support claims to be brought by a spouse, sibling, child and parent of a deceased. In order to qualify as a “dependant”, however, a spouse, parent, child or sibling must be someone to whom the deceased: (a) was providing support immediately before death; or (b) was under a legal obligation to provide support immediately before death.

It is noteworthy that the definition of a “child” is not limited to minor children, or even financially dependant children. 

While claims of adult children financially supported at death are clearly recognized by the Courts, it appears that there may be a new type of claimant on the horizon – that of an independent adult child to whom no financial support was being paid immediately prior to death. 

The reason for this change can be linked to the development and application of the concept of the “moral” obligation of a deceased (see Tataryn v. Tataryn Estate and, more recently, Cummings v. Cummings), and the Courts’ interest in protecting spouses and children through applying such principle.

While it is still early days, the reasoning in certain cases subsequent to Cummings (including Juffs v. Investors Group Financial, Broderick v. Papathanasiou and Perilli v. Foley Estate) may foretell that independent adult children will have a better chance of succeeding on a dependant support claim than before. Some factors that may impact on such a claim could include the size of the estate, whether there are other competing support claims, and the intentions of the deceased.   

While claims of independent adults will no doubt remain more tenuous than claims of adult children to whom financial support was being provided at death, it will be interesting to see how the law develops in this regard. For a more comprehensive analysis of this issue, I recommend reading Susan J. Woodley’s paper entitled “The (Almost, Possible, Probable) Right of an Adult Child to Receive Support”, presented at the Ontario Bar Association 2009 Institute of Continuing Legal Education.

Have a great day!

Natalia Angelini

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

This year’s trusts and estates section of the Institute was held on Tuesday, February 3, 2009. The programme featured a broad and interesting selection of topics by experienced practitioners.

Topics included:

• Estate planning for ‘complex’ families
• Environmental liability issues for trustees, executors, attorneys and guardians
• Family law surprises
• Conflict of laws in cases of multi-jurisdictional families and their assets
• Developments in costs in estates and capacity litigation
• Trustee mistakes
• Rights of adult beneficiaries to receive support
• Capacity assessments
• Power of attorney pitfalls

The programme was informative and insightful and a great opportunity to meet and speak with leading estate practitioners. If you were unable to attend, the seminar materials are available from the Ontario Bar Association.

Have a great day!

Bianca La Neve

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

The cooler weather is cause for many people, retirees especially, to plan an annual sojourn south.

In preparing for the winter, protecting real property -- often a significant asset -- may be top of mind.

My colleague, Paul Trudelle, wrote about "Real Estate Transactions Involving Powers of Attorney" in July 2008.  While travelling south for the winter does not require a sale, steps can be taken to minimize risks to real property.  The Government of Ontario suggests that to avoid real estate fraud one should protect his or her identity and be alert to identity theft.

Regarding a Power of Attorney, the government also suggests caution:  "Whenever you give another person a power of attorney that permits them to deal with your personal assets, you should consult with your lawyers or advisers regarding appropriate limitations."

In a 2004 Canadian Bar Association paper -- Cross-Border Issues for Snowbirds and Roaming Retirees - Marilyn Piccini Roy wrote: "If the Snowbird owns real estate elsewhere, this power of attorney may not be recognized there if the law of the situs applies its own law to the formal or substantive validity of the power of attorney or to its effectiveness vis-à-vis third parties."   If a Power of Attorney deals with assets in different jurisdictions, one should seek legal advice in the jurisdiction of the asset(s).

Recent Ontario case law highlights issues that can arise regarding real estate when a fraudulent Power of Attorney is used.  Reviczky v. Meleknia; Caplan (Intervenor) 2007 Canlii 56494 (On. S.C.) raises quesitons about a solicitor's duty to"go behind" a Power of Attorney by enquiring about the donor's mental capacity at the time of signing and later, as well as evidentiary requirements.  The recent case law reminds all of us, including snowbirds, of the risks that exist with a Power of Attorney.  

Jonathan Morse 

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

As a WWII pay officer in the Canadian military, my paternal grandfather met a British woman on the beach when he was stationed in the south of England. They married soon after the War and retired in England in the mid-1960s.  My grandfather died in the early 1990s; when my step-grandmother, Tessa, died in 2008, in her Will she left her house to my father and aunt.

If there were no Will, Tessa's estate could have contributed to the British government's coffers.  In that circumstance, a probate research firm could have played a role. 

Title Research is one of the firms highlighted in yesterdays blog about "heir hunters".  Its services include: searches for missing beneficiaries, heirs, and legal documents (such as marriage, birth and death certificates back to the 1800s); asset research to value, verify and find missing or unknown assets; missing beneficiary indemnity insurance; probate valuations; and will searches to determine that the Will is the deceased's last will. 

If Tessa had died intestate, Title Research, and other firms, could have located her heirs around the world.  Alternatively, if the estate trustee had questions about the value of the estate assets, or had the trustee not known the whereabouts of the beneficiaries, it could have enlisted a search firm's services as some anecdotes suggest.

Potentially trustees can protect their personal liability by engaging a firm that has a best practices endorsement of Britain's Law Society.  It seems that an estate need not just have ties to the UK, but the extent of a firm's expertise in a specific jurisdiction would have to be assessed.

Interestingly, some of the detective work can be done by amateur sleuths: www.findmypast.com and www.ancestry.co.uk allow access to census data from the 1800s and a host of other historical information.  If genealogy is in your blood, it's a place to start.  And, as one UK law firm suggests, it might be advisable to do some of your own investigating.

Jonathan Morse

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

In Scotland for my honeymoon, I encountered a few different “estates”. Hiking the West Highland Way – averaging about 12 miles a day – we passed Blackmount Lodge, in the Bridge of Orchy. The lodge, owned by the Fleming family (of James Bond fame) sits on the edge of an idyllic loch. It took a day to walk across the estate.

Fellow walkers from Britain were interested to learn that I work in estate litigation. After sorting out differences in our terminology, they asked if “heir hunters” exist in Canada. I was intrigued.

While I still do not know the extent of “heir hunting” here, I learned that Heir Hunters is a BBC series that follows probate detectives who look for distant relatives of people who have died without making a will. I have not heard of a similar program in North America.

Several UK firms track down missing relatives: Fraser and Fraser  and Title Research are two examples. About 545,000 people die in Britain every year and half of them do not have a will. As in Ontario, there are rules in Britain which dictate that when people die intestate, their estate passes to the deceased’s legal next of kin. In Britain, if there is no family, the estate falls to the Crown.  The Guardian claims that £10 million to £20 million falls to the government every year because there is no one to claim the estate. Heir hunters locate the next of kin and alert them to their inheritance; there is a finder’s fee of up to 25% of the amount.

Many people in Canada can trace their roots to the United Kingdom. Estate practitioners, if advising estate trustees, would be well served to keep “heir hunting” firms in mind. 

Thank you for reading.  Enjoy your day.

Jonathan Morse

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

The superrich likely have the market cornered when it comes to epic estate battles - Howard Hughes, J. Howard Marshall (i.e. Anna Nicole Smith), and E. Howard Hunt (of silver fame) - quickly come to mind.

However, even the mildly famous or sainted can have their moment in the estate spotlight.  Recently, Luciano Pavarotti's family was in the news when a dispute arose among his offspring in respect of his considerable fortune.  They have apparently reached a settlement.

I also read with interest a recent US newspaper article indicating that two of Martin Luther King's children had filed a lawsuit against a third regarding a dispute over the civil rights leader's estate (J. Edger Hoover would have loved it).  Bernice King and Martin Luther King III filed a lawsuit in Atlanta in order to force their brother, Dexter King, to open the books of their famous father's estate.

From what I understand, the lawsuit claims that Dexter King, who is the executor of his father's estate, has refused to provide his brother and sister with documents concerning the estate's administration.  The lawsuit claims that Dexter King and the estate "converted substantial funds from the estate's financial accounts…for their own use".  The siblings were never told beforehand and are now seeking financial records and other documents in order to investigate the administration of the estate. 

Martin Luther King's "dream" seems to have stalled when it comes to sibling rivalry and the fortunes of his estate.  However, on a more serious note, the dispute once again reminds us of the importance of transparency in the administration of an estate and open communication between executor and beneficiary.

Thanks for reading.  Auf Wiedersehen

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Welcome to my week of blogs.

An issue that can crop up in estate litigation is whether a party is entitled to interim payment of costs payable out of the estate.  The reason for such an order is to fund litigation, such as a will challenge, out of the largesse of the estate.

The court has the discretion to order the interim payment of costs pursuant to Section 131 of the Courts of Justice Act.  A number of cases have addressed the interim payment of costs, including Waese v. Bojman as well as Zhao v. Ismail Estate (Trustee of) (link not available).  Both decisions recognize the court’s inherent jurisdiction to award interim costs in a proceeding, including estate actions.

As with any exercise of judicial discretion, the facts are crucial and how those facts are marshalled and presented to the court may carry the day.  Proper evidence and complete and financial disclosure is required.  However, even where an interim payment of costs is allowed, the court is likely to impose terms and require costs to be paid out in stages based on the progress of the litigation.

Thanks for reading.  A demain.

Justin

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

There is the view by some that issues surrounding the interpretations of Wills can be mind-numbing.  From time to time I tend to enjoy dusting off my book of consolidated estate statutes and reviewing some of the basic tenets of estate law, which makes our area of practice so dynamic.

The issue of a failed gift is a common subject in the context of will interpretations. The Ontario Legislature has considered failed gifts in sections 23 and 31 of the Succession Law Reform Act.

In essence, Section 23 states that unless a contrary intention appears in the subject-will, when a devisee or legatee predeceases the testator, the failed gift falls into the residue of the testator’s estate. 

Section 31 is commonly referred to as the "anti-lapse provision."  Section 31 prevents devises or bequests from failing by virtue of the devisee or legatee predeceasing the testator. In such a scenario, a gift is saved if the devise or bequest was left for a child, grand-child, brother or sister of the testator and the pre-deceased devisee or legatee died leaving a spouse or issue who survived the testator. If these conditions have been met, the devise or bequest will not fall into the residue, however it will take effect as if it had been made directly to the spouse or issue of predeceased devisee or legatee. 

Thank you for reading,

Rick Bickhram

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

The Succession Law Reform Act (“SLRA”) governs the rights of beneficiaries to receive support and other benefits on death.

In Cummings v. Cummings, [2003] 5 E.T.R (3d) 81 (Ont. S.C.J.); affirmed [2004] 69 O.R. (3d) 398 (Ont. C.A.), Ontario’s Court of Appeal held that when examining all of the circumstances of an Application for Dependant’s Relief under the SLRA, the Court is entitled to take into account not only the needs of the dependants but the moral obligation of the deceased to those dependants.

Today’s blog, as well as my blogs for the balance of this week, will look at several dependant support cases in the post Cummings era. 

In Broderick v. Papathanasiou, [2006] O.J. No. 4707 (Ont. S.C.J.), Ms. Broderick contended that she lived with Mr. Papathanasiou (the “deceased”) in a common law relationship for 8 years prior to his death.

The deceased did not provide for Ms. Broderick in his Will or during his lifetime.  Ms. Broderick earned more money than the deceased during some of the years they lived together.  They lived in residences owned by the deceased.

Ms. Broderick claimed she was a dependent spouse and asked that the Court make an order for her support under the SLRA.

The Court found that Ms. Broderick’s contributions to the deceased’s personal and financial well-being, to the detriment of her own finances, should be recognized by an award from the estate.

The Court held that the requirement for “adequate provision” to a dependant under the SLRA had been expansively interpreted by the courts; it was no longer a strictly needs based analysis; the deceased’s moral duty towards his dependents was now also a relevant decision, citing Cummings.

As the estate was not large enough to make provision for Ms. Broderick’s support indefinitely, the Court found that a lump sum would support her in transition and provide for her relocation and that it was also equitable that the deceased’s daughters should enjoy the benefit of their father’s estate as he intended under the will.

In the end, the Court ordered that the deceased’s condominium be sold and Ms. Broderick receive one half of the net proceeds in recognition of her contributions to the deceased’s well-being.

Thanks for reading.

Craig

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

The annual conference of Society of Trust and Estate Practitioners is upon us.  Yesterday’s full day of interesting talks was capped off with a tenth anniversary gala dinner at The Royal York. 

It was great to see a full house of estate, trust, accounting and tax practitioners decked out in their finest to enjoy an evening with their peers, and honouring the lifetime achievements of Professor Emeritus Donovan Waters.  Prof. Waters, a pioneer of trust law and author of the leading text of trust law in Canada, was introduced by four esteemed speakers. True to his reputation, Prof. Waters delivered a thoughtful and engaging acceptance speech.  It was a lovely evening.

The conference will wrap up after another full day of talks today. See you there!

Have a great weekend,

Natalia

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Yesterday, Hull & Hull LLP hosted one of its informative Breakfast Series.

David Smith started off the seminar with a talk on the challenge of exercising an estate’s controlling interest in private corporations.  His discussion included the following observations:

-                   the obligation of an estate trustee to exercise his or her controlling interest is that of a “reasonably prudent businessman”

-                   the trustee must determine the value of the company in as timely a manner as possible

-                   depending on the wording of the Will, the trustee must provide for the company’s continuation, sale or liquidation

-                   in order for the trustee to make such a decision he/she should review the Will, financial statements and corporate records, and should inquire with individuals who have knowledge of the company’s affairs including beneficiaries, family, directors, shareholders, employees, solicitors, accountants and bankers

-                   it is advisable for a trustee to have an active role in management by, among other things, sitting on the board of directors (despite there being no legal obligation to do so)

Sean Graham followed with a discussion on evidence in estate litigation, and Ian Hull spoke about interesting case law developments.  You can find a more thorough consideration of these topics in their presented papers.

Until tomorrow,

Natalia

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

In Schwartz Estate v. Kwinter the divorce of the mother and father in 1996 divided the family, with one daughter, Elaine, siding with the father and the other daughter, Shelley, siding with the mother.  The father then made new Wills giving everything to Elaine, and the mother likewise made new Wills giving everything to Shelley.

The father died in 2003.  A dispute arose about the purported understanding between the parents in making these Wills leading Elaine to commence an action seeking, among other things, that her mother disclose the testamentary instructions given to her solicitor for the purposes of drafting her Wills, which the mother opposed on the ground that such instructions were privileged. 

The Court held that although a Will is privileged until the testator dies, and although instructions to a testator's solicitor and the related work product are also privileged, that the mother voluntarily waived privilege by producing her Wills and by swearing affidavits relying on their content.

Another approach one could perhaps take in such circumstances is to refuse to produce a Will at the outset and claim that it is a privileged document, which may then likely lead to a court determining the issue.  If one is ultimately compelled to produce their Will by court order it would likely be viewed as involuntary disclosure, and therefore any claim for further disclosure (i.e. solicitor's instructions and file documents) could again be met with a fresh assertion of privilege. 

Have a nice day,

Natalia

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

In a recent edition of the OBA Estates and Trusts Section newsletter, Deadbeat, Justin de Vries wrote an article commenting on the summary trial and how it can be a way to curb the costs of estate litigation (in claims of $50,000 or less).  This article is worth a read, and I thought in today's blog I would add my voice to his chorus.

While counsel may often overlook the option of summary trial (in Rule 76 of the Rules of Civil Procedure), there is no reason that it shouldn't be invoked in certain estate disputes.  At a minimum, some thought should be given to it before the pre-trial stage, since the pre-trial judge or master can decide what mode of trial is appropriate if no agreement has been reached between the parties before that time.

Some of the cost-saving measures of a summary trial include the following:

1. Evidence in chief is to be adduced by affidavit.

2. A party wishing to cross-examine the deponent on an affidavit, which can be done orally, can take no more than 50 minutes.

3. Closing arguments can take no more than 45 minutes for each party.

Proceeding by way of summary trial may also lead to a comparatively quick result and correspondingly lower cost awards.  Something worth considering…

Thanks for reading,

Natalia

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Soulsbury v. Soulsbury is an interesting appeal from a decision of the Central London County Court about a contract dispute involving a divorced couple.

The couple had been married for 20 years, and after the breakdown of their marriage the ex-husband was ordered to make periodic payments to the ex-wife.  The couple remained on friendly terms.  The ex-husband later suggested that rather than continue to pay periodic support that he should leave £100,000 to the ex-wife in his Will.  The ex-wife agreed to this proposal and they put their agreement into effect.

The ex-husband subsequently fell ill and died, marrying another woman on the morning of his death, which revoked his Will.  After his widow refused to pay the legacy from the estate, the ex-wife brought a claim for payment.

The trial judge found in favour of the ex-wife, holding that a binding agreement had been entered into between the couple.  The widow unsuccessfully appealed.  In response to her arguments to the contrary, the appellate Court held that (i) by entering into the agreement the ex-wife had not bartered away her right to future maintenance or ousted the jurisdiction of the matrimonial court; and (ii) the agreement between the couple was governed by ordinary contract principles (not principles relating to an agreement for the compromise of ancillary relief) and therefore the principal that such an agreement does not give rise to a contract enforceable at law did not apply. 

This serves as a good reminder that when contemplating rearranging one’s support arrangements, in even the most amicable of scenarios, a contingency plan should be in place to deal with the event that either of the parties may enter into a subsequent marriage.

Have a good day,

Natalia

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link